Sorry to take so long to add my two cents to the "behind our
backs" debate. I did want to represent the law firm experience in this
matter (at least our firm's experience). Definitely there is a very real
problem with CALR vendors going behind the backs of firm librarians in
their attempts to commit the firms to use more online services.
In my experience, Mead Data Central (MDC) has a much worse record
on this than West. West has been quite respectful of the fact that the
librarians in our firm (as in most) have responsibility for and authority
over CALR sevices. An easier time with West in this regard seems to be
the case with most firm librarians I speak with (though I have heard a
West horror story or two). Interestingly, an academic colleague I was
speaking with on the phone claimed the opposite experience in the academic
setting; in this person's experience, West was perceived as hard-sell
and MDC has been more respectful of the librarians.
While some of this is probably traceable to individual
personalities, with MDC there seems to be a company-wide philosophy of
hard-sell and, damn the librarians, get the people at the top. Joe
Stephens has offered the most plausible explanation I've heard; that this
is a holdover from the past when CALR was new and novel enough that firm
administrators/managing partners needed to be in on the decision as to
whether or not to commit large amounts of firm's resources (money and
training time, etc.) to a new technology. In its day it WAS an important
decision. However, CALR is now routine in the firms and, in fact, an
understanding of the subtleties around the different systems and the
skills necessary for using them both to best advantage are most likely
going to be found in the firm's librarian.
Our firm recognizes this and grants the librarians responsibility
for the systems and the authority to act as needed. That this firm
expects this was recently reconfirmed when MDC tried to work "behind
our backs" and, gratifyingly, was rebuffed. All roads led back to the
librarians. MDC then had to deal with two very unhappy librarians after
MDC had made something of a show of challenging our authority. It made
for some powerful bargaining, though. Not a pleasant experience, but
important in getting MDC to realize that they couldn't work behind our
backs, even if they tried. Unfortunately not all firms recognize the
skills of their librarians as nicely as ours.
I suppose that MDC wouldn't continue in this offensive practice if
it didn't work. However, once they get into a setting of lawyers who lack
the intimate knowledge of the subtleties of the systems and history of use
in the firm, many of MDC's questionable assertions go unchallenged and
they can do some really slick sales pitches. Unfortunately, these pitches
present only a partial reality, at least in the firms who have access to a
wide variety of systems and research tools. MDC fails (deliberatly?) to
recognize that in a firm with many different attorneys and computer skill
levels and research needs and expectations, the research environment is a
complex web of different systems and formats of which Westlaw or
Lexis/Nexis is merely a part. I'm astonished when this aspect is
downplayed by vendors and this is where MDC like to talk to senior
administrators/partners who often don't have a solid grasp on how research is
done in their own firm. Educating these administrators/partners is the
best antidote to overzealous vendor reps. Otherwise, your firm may be in
danger of buying more online time than it needs.
Finally, to excuse vendors' bad behavior by saying, as Bob Berring
recently did, that vendors "sometimes go behind our backs because we aren't
using them" ignores the fact that they have a very single-minded
objective: to increase use of their service in the firms (i.e., increase
profitability). The goal of the law school training programs is to get
converts to a system, converts who will likely be faithful out in the
firms. CALR vendors try to oversell their products in the firms and to do
this will work behind our backs to find less savvy shoppers. This is not
a sign that we aren't using them but that they feel that they have a
better chance of selling to the uneducated and unwary
partners/administrators who are more susceptible to their sales pitches.
Put your foot down; don't let them do this! It leads to higher costs for
your institution and each time MDC (or West) gets away with going behind
our backs, it reinforces this behavior.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : 03/07/00 PST